After a trip to Europe (including a visit to the USSR), the Paulings returned in the fall of 1957 to find a new challenge: a leading scientist was eagerly and publicly refuting Pauling’s anti-Bomb claims. His name was Edward Teller. The Hungarian-born physicist, dubbed "The Father of the H-bomb" by the press, was a committed anti-Communist who was certain that ever-more powerful weapons were the only thing forestalling a Soviet world takeover. He was determined to maintain the US tactical advantage.

Pauling admired Teller as a scientist, but detested his politics. In February 1958, on live television, they went to war. The venue was a one-hour debate in the studio of an educational station in San Francisco. The topic was the development of nuclear weapons. From the start, both men went on the offensive, with Pauling accusing Teller of making "many statements that are not true and many statements that are seriously misleading." Teller responded by highlighting the virtues of nuclear power and saying of fallout, "This alleged damage which the small radioactivity is causing -- supposedly cancer and leukemia -- has not been proved to the best of my knowledge by any decent and clear statistics. . . . It is even possible to my mind that there is no damage." They seesawed back and forth, Pauling raising specific criticisms, Teller countering with visions of a rosy, atom-powered future. Pauling seemed to grow increasingly shrill and humorless as the debate went on; Teller seemed by comparison relaxed and avuncular, turning Pauling’s questions and accusations aside with irrelevant comparisons or witticisms. When it was over, Pauling refused to debate him again, "because I consider his debating methods improper," Pauling said.